I would like to note the lower minimum wage actually brought unemployment down, and the raise rose unemployment.

"Two years ago Mr. Neumark and William Wascher, a Federal Reserve economist, reviewed more than 100 academic studies on the impact of the minimum wage. They found "overwhelming" evidence that the least skilled and the young suffer a loss of employment when the minimum wage is increased." [2] And guess what? the least skilled are teenagers. The study shows 1 70 cent increase --------> 300,000 jobs lost.

C2: Raises Overall unemployment

"Economists have studied the job-destroying features of a higher minimum wage. Estimates of the job losses of raising the minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.15 have ranged from 625,000 to 1,000,000 lost jobs. It is important to recognize that the jobs lost are mainly entry-level jobs. By destroying entry-level jobs, a higher minimum wage harms the lifetime earnings prospects of low-skilled workers. " [1]

Out of the many studies proving the minimum wage raise hurts the economy, only 1 said it was good, another study tried to duplucate the results with no conclusion near the same. The study was debunked. [3]

"With all of this recessions significant labor market problems, and the expensive federal efforts to offset them, its too bad that the minimum-wage law added so many people to the list of those who today cannot find jobs." [4] This makes logical sense, let me prove this:

Let's say pe hour I am worth about 7$. If you rose the minimum wage to 7.25 or 9$ then I am out of a job. Hiring me would be charity. Most employers are not able to afford this, so basically it disqualifies me from a job.

C3: Mininium wages increase teenage dropouts

A raise in the minimum wage not only raises unemployment, but forces highschoolropouts. [5] This study actually proves any increasein the minimum wage increases highschool dropouts. [6] Now what is the reason? Money. The igher wages influence them to drop out of school, the their eyes have $ signs in them. Now, this doesn't gerentee they find jobs. Actually, most of them never find minimum wage jobs when they drop out. [1, 6] This means we have less education, and well frankly a worse country.

C4: The minimum wage will raise prices

"The federal increase from $4.25 to $5.15 costs California families an average of $133 more per year for the goods they normally purchase. Since higher-income families spend more, they would pay more in absolute terms than lower-income families: up to $234 per year compared to $84 per year." [7]

This makes sense. If you raise the cost of labor it costs more to actually make the product, the the employer must actually charge more to make the same profit. As the minimum wage increases, not only do companies fire employees, they also raise prices to help the budget. And in the end, this will make it harderfor people, especially poor people, to buynecessary things. That in turn reduces GDP growth because there is less buying, and know, this will plungeus into another recession. [8]

Oh btw the reason I did not quote the last part of the paragraoh from 8 is because he plagarised me first. SO thats my former words from an old debate, so as ts mine origionally I did not quote it.

Conclusion:

My opponent will falsely use the "general welfare clause" Its funny as unemployment =/= general welfare, a 5$ wage is better than no wage. My opponent really then is saying more dropouts, higher prices, and higher unemployment is general welfare, so if he uses this argument it is basically False. Minimum wage hikes lead to more unemployment and higher prices which is bad for the economy. Also as kids drop out we have a less edcated country. VOTE CON, VOTE ECONOMY!

I would like to start off by stating that I do not have to state a specific amount the minimum wage should be raised to, therefore, my evidence can conflict in that regard.

I would also like to note that in this topic we are speaking on a federal level; that is, we are assuming this is something the government would pass.

In my opponents conclusion, he talks of how it is better to earn five dollars than no dollars. That would be lowering MW (minimum wage), therefore, he is in conflict with himself there. My opponent must maintain that the MW should be kept at the same rate.

First, Small businesses say MW has little to NO IMPACT on small businesses.

Eight in 10 small-business owners say they hire their new employees at a wage level that exceeds the current minimum wage. Of the 14% of small businesses who do hire employees at the minimum wage, two in three say they do not expect to keep their new employees at that wage for more than a year. One in three of these new minimum wage employees are also hired on only a temporary basis. http://www.gallup.com...

And later, Forty-six percent of small-business owners say they believe the minimum wage should be increased while only 34% believe it should remain where it is now. Only 2% believe the minimum wage should be reduced although 14% think it should be eliminated altogether.

And more!
Eighty-six percent of small-business owners say the minimum wage has no effect on their businesses.

Now you may say, "These are arguments for MW to stay", but look at the 2nd stat! The majority of small business owners think it should be increased! It is completely logical then, to refute my opponents C2 and C4, as business owners are fine with it. These are gallup polls BTW.

Next, the American people want a higher MW. More than two-thirds of Americans say lawmakers should raise the national minimum wage to $10 per hour from its current $7.25, a survey from the Public Religion Research Institute finds. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
So, since we are speaking of the federal government, and the government represents the people, then the government has an obligation to obey the peoples wishes and RAISE THE MW.

Also, American people want more money, even if it risks their job.

The three most-mentioned financial concerns in the Jan. 7-9, 2011, poll have been at the top of Americans' list for the past two years, with little change in the percentages who name each one.
Note the first chart at http://www.gallup.com... (source)
Next, an increase of MW was found to have no effect on job loss
David Card and Alan B. Krueger, two leading economists, however, believe that small to moderate increases in the minimum wage will not increase unemployment. These two economists observed the impact of minimum wage on employment by researching 410 fast-food restaurants in New Jersey and Pennsylvania before and after a minimum wage rise. In April of 1992, New Jersey's minimum wage rose from $4.25 to $5.05, Pennsylvania's minimum wage remaining constant.
Under the traditional theory, the increase in New Jersey's minimum wage would predict higher unemployment. The study, on the other hand, suggested that raising the wage floor would in fact open new jobs. Card and Krueger also introduced the idea of wage levels influencing productivity. Higher productivity may offset the increased production costs. The minimum wage increase occurred during a recession in the New Jersey economy. Secondly, New Jersey's economy is greatly influenced by nearby states due to its small size. However, when minimum wage increased, full-time employment increased in New Jersey relative to Pennsylvania full-time employment.
And more!
Economically conservative lawmakers traditionally argue that raising the minimum wage hurts small businesses because they cannot afford to pay higher wages, and therefore are forced to layoff workers, further augmenting poverty. In a study done by the Levy Institute, the vast majority of small business owners interviewed said a raise in minimum wage would not cause them to layoff workers, or decrease the number of new workers they could hire. The Levy Institute interviewed 560 businesses with under 500 workers each, asking them questions about their hiring practices, particularly with regard to a possible increase in the minimum wage. Of those businesses, only 6.2% said a raise in the minimum wage would negatively affect their hiring practices. When the minimum wage was increased in 1997, economists and lawmakers feared there would be significant job losses, but instead it was the best job market in 30 years. This shows the demand for labor is wage inelastic; meaning changes in wages does not affect the amount of labor demanded.
From http://wiki.dickinson.edu...

And next, the rising inflation calls a need for a higher MW. From the same source as above
The Problem with the current Minimum wage is that it has failed to keep up with inflation and rising cost of living. This means that over time the purchasing power of the minimum wage has decrease. The current minimum wage is not longer enough to keep working families from meeting their most basic needs such as cost of housing and food, health care, education and child care. According to Economist Jared Bernstein from the Economic Policy Institute the cost of basic necessities has increase by almost 50% between 1991 and 2007. As a result low income families are stock in poverty and the income gap between the low and high class is continuously increasing.
The federal poverty guideline released in 2007 shows that the minimum wage is insufficient. A minimum wage worker that works full time: 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year will only earn about $12,000 annually. This means that at the current minimum wage, a full time worker earns 40% below the poverty guideline. The established federal poverty guideline for a family of three is approximately $17,000

So it can be obviously seen here that we should raise the MW, and there are numerous things about it.

Next, to rebut my opponents contentions:

C1: Well what have we here? His source also admits that an alternate explanation could simply be the bad economy. And also, this makes no sense, considering the many polls I have provided.

The biggest explanation is of course the bad economy. But it's precisely when the economy is down and businesses are slashing costs that raising the minimum wage is so destructive to job creation. Congress began raising the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour in July 2007, and there are now 691,000 fewer teens working. (from his source #2)

C2: source was from 1996. Thats before adam was born. The current recession had not hit yet, and so this source is hopelessly outdated.

C3: His argument makes no logical sense. All of the high schoolers I know know that if you spend the extra 2 years and finish, that instantly opens up a motley amount of options for you. It simply makes no logical sense

C4: Wait… So high income families spent $86 a YEAR? Are they all starving themselves or something? There is now way that stat makes ANY real sense.

To talk on teenagers for a bit:

The thing here is that teenagers technically don't need a job, and whenever they finish high school, they are automatically more eligible for jobs.

Actually business owners say it would increase their costs significantly. [1] Business owners say if the minimum wage rises they will lay off current workers and have to try to hire other workers worth the wage. [1] In new york business owners say the raise in the minimum wage will lead to their demise. [2]

My opponents argument goes against all economic theory. Any increase in costs lead to workers being fired, this is simple economics. This article written by a business owner states a minimum wage raise would increase costs forcing him to lay of workers. [3] Your argument is against all economic theory. Also he said 86% say it wouldn't effect them, this means 14% get effected badly, that's still enough to raise unemployment. So basically his argument says it HAS NO effect, well he conceded 14% GET EFFECTED, so No =/= 14%, he conceded his case. a 14% change is bad.

R2: American lawmakers

This is a way to buy votes good sir. This non scientific poll shows 70% of people want to raise the min wage. [4] But in a poll they asked: "would you support a minimum wage raise if you heard it destroyed jobs" only 46% say yes. [5] So in reality if the truth where told the politicians woudl flip flop for votes.

R3: doesn't effect jobs

I already refuted this last round, that study was disproved! DISPROVED.

"Proponents have been able to muddle the debate by pointing to a study done by two Princeton economists, David Card and Alan Krueger. These economists claimed to find that raising the minimum wage does not lower employment. In one paper, they succeeded in casting doubt on 200 years of economic research and theory. Economists took their challenge seriously and attempted to recreate their results. It could not be done. Economists who attempted to replicate their work demonstrated conclusively that raising the minimum wage destroys jobs." [5]

They never proved and remade the results. Then next paragraph they state it was DISPROVEN by economic science. [5]

"The biggest explanation is of course the bad economy. But it's precisely when the economy is down and businesses are slashing costs that raising the minimum wage is so destructive to job creation. " [7]

It said the minimum wage actually has an effect, and it is worse with the bad economy. It links both as a reason, it never singles it out into either or. It stated IT AS THE ECOMOMY AND THE MINIMUM WAGE! You misread the source. Also the graph I provided proves my point, min wage goes up, teen unemployment does too. It goes down, unemploymnt drops.

"Earlier this year, economist David Neumark of the University of California, Irvine, wrote on these pages that the 70-cent-an-hour increase in the minimum wage would cost some 300,000 jobs." [7]

Point pressed on.

Rc2: Overall unemployment

You still do not see the point, in economics the same data applies as buisness when it comes to costs stays the same. More costs = more unemployment. As my opponent is eager for a neer source, this time with a graph:

Would you rather leave school when you get a wage of 10$ or 5$? 10. But as I stated this actually doesn't mean the get a job, and they likely do not get a job. They dropout, with sadening results. The statistics are on my side: Minimum wage raises = more dropouts. [8]

Rc4: Prices

he actualy does not refute this, just says in makes no sense. The source in my interpretation means that you spend that much per day/week. It also may be per item like on banannas. As I have stated the minimum wagincreases cost ----> less employment and well higher prices to gain money. As yu have not refuted my main points I extend the argument.

Conclusion:

The minimum wage, if increased, will have detrimental effects on prices, employment, and in turn the economy. I have proved a minimum wage is bad, and refuted my oppooents case and kept mine alive with facts. I urge a CON vote.